Two Approaches

Throughout history, in the West and the East, people trying to understand the world tend to fall in two camps, the invisible-is-more-real and the physical-is-more-real. Parmenides vs. Empedocles, Plato vs. Aristotle, Descartes vs. Locke, Ramanuja vs. Shankara.

The first group concludes that there is more to reality than what we sense with our five senses. In fact, they believe that this physical world is a kind of illusion. The second group concludes that the real world is the physical world we sense. Sure, there are meanings and interpretations of senses that change, this second group asserts, but the real world is a prosaic one, not a mystical or ideal abstract one.

For those who believe in a better, more ideal world existing outside our ability to detect with our five senses, they tend to conclude that there is a greater consciousness or awareness or design that is beyond our ability to perceive yet is there nonetheless and we can “sense” this more real reality with a kind of sixth sense. There are some ideas that are true and we can eventually reach an understanding of this truth.

For those who believe in the current physical world around us being the real world, even though we clearly do not understand much of it, they tend to conclude that there is no absolute “truth” per say, only our understanding of what our senses present us with. We will never reach an ultimate truth that is true for all people, situations, or times, because we will always learn more about the world around us.

Conservatives tend to believe that traditional values reflect some kind of absolute truths in the world. Progressives tend to believe that there is a relative perspective in any given situation so what is true for one person, or group of people, may not be true for another person or group of people. What’s true for us today may not be true for us tomorrow.

One group emphasizes how things don’t really change except on the surface, whereas the other group emphasizes that things always change, that things can always be better. The first group suggests that “the more things change, the more they stay the same.” The second group suggests that “nothing ever stays the same" and the old ways were not so great so should be changed, improved, updated.

Which side do I land on? It is clear that things change but I absolutely lean towards the first group. There seems to be consistent patterns that occur over and over. People are people, no matter what culture or era. Life is life; experience is experience, regardless how we interpret it. Perception exists, even though different opinions about that perception exist. People live and people die – over and over – yet what is important stays the same: being good; fighting bad; family bonds; striving to reach your potential; staying healthy.

Chess Set

I made this chess set a few years ago and dug it out when the little one got interested recently in playing chess. The pieces were made from the slats of an old baby crib and the chess board itself is two 2x10's glued together then scored with a skill saw. It's got a screen door handle to carry it around. It was in the Madisonville Elementary Library for a year or two so the kids could use it.






It's not beautiful but it is functional!